Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill (BP)

Team O ENGR 1181Mike Zhang

Austin BlackerbyMicah BernathRachel Nelson

Issues and Points of Ethical Conflict

QuestionsShould BP have drilled as deep as they did? Should

deepwater oil production be pursued in light of the lack of

adequate technology and scientific knowledge of the

impacts of such production? Should the government more closely monitor and regulate corporations who have the capacity to greatly damage the country’s ecosystems?

Issues-role of self-interest in the

decision- role of government in

corporate oversight- role of profit over

responsibility to the safety - health and welfare of the public, responsibility to the

environment - responsibility to the

reputation of the engineering profession.

Interested Parties or Stakeholders

BP oil company Fishermen

Federal government State governments

Tourism industry Oil industry

Environmental agencies

Protagonist BP, Federal government, rig operator Transocean, contractor

Halliburton, Anadarko Petroleum, and MOEX USA.

Duties or Obligations of the Protagonist to Stakeholders

Stakeholder 1Fishermen

Obligations to StakeholderBP had to provide assistance to the families that lost their livelihood to the oil spill by donations of money. Provisions are being made to compensate the group involved in fishing along the Gulf Coast, which include oystermen, businesses, shrimpers, and people who lost waterfront property.

Stakeholder 2Federal government

Obligations to StakeholderBP is expected to pay the settlements and law suits that they have been placed with. They were expected to plead guilty to the deaths of the 11 workers in the accident.

Stakeholder 3Tourism industry

Obligations to StakeholderBP is expected to not have a negative impact on the tourist industry because the oil spill affected the natural habitat of the surrounding area. The tourism industries close to the affected area expected a reimbursement for the loss of business post-spill.

Stakeholder 4Environmental agencies

Obligations to StakeholderThe EPA expected BP to abide by the suspension of buying new contracts or buying oil leases in the Gulf of Mexico. As a result of BP’s lack of business integrity, the EPA also expected BP to be barred from new federal government contracts.

Stakeholder 5Oil industry

Obligations to StakeholderThe oil industry expects BP to have large improvements in the safety and environmental impact of the company. With this, the oil industry may not receive the stereotype that all the industry cares about is money.

Potential Actions and Their Consequences (Positive and Negative)Action AContainment booms used to either corral oil or protect ecologically sensitive areas

Positive Consequences Negative Consequences-Protect marshes, mangroves, shrimp/crab oyster ranches and other ecologically sensitive areas

-Ineffective in relatively calm and slow-moving waters-Washed up on shore with oil-Allowed oil to escape above and below boom-Useless in more than three to four-foot seas

Action BLouisiana Barrier Plan

Positive Consequences Negative Consequences-Protect the coast of Louisiana -Expensive

-Poor results-Allegedly more political than scientific

Action CCorexit Oil Dispersant

Positive Consequences Negative Consequences-The most effective and fast moving tool for minimizing shoreline impact

-Could contain potential cancer causing agents-Increased threat to sea turtles and bluefin tuna-Dangerous to humans when in eyes, skin or ingested -Studies concluded that mixing the oil and dispersant increased the toxicity of the oil by 52 times  

Action DFires

Positive Consequences Negative Consequences-Cheap-Removed more than 5% of oil

-Released a small amount of toxins, including cancer- causing dioxins 

Action EOil Eating Microbes

-Designed to digest the oil before it reaches the surface-Successfully consumed part of the oil

-An increase in microbial activity might reduce subsea oxygen levels, which would threaten fish and other sea creatures-Research found the microbes consumed more natural gas than oil 

Action EOil Eating Microbes

-Designed to digest the oil before it reaches the surface-Successfully consumed part of the oil

-An increase in microbial activity might reduce subsea oxygen levels, which would threaten fish and other sea creatures-Research found the microbes consumed more natural gas than oil 

Action FExplosives (Nuclear) 

-In theory was the only way BP could permanently seal the well

-If this failed, it would block all other options from being implemented

Shore clean up using sand sifting, removing tar balls, and digging out tar mats

-Successfully removed a majority of the oil from the shore

-Expensive and time consuming

Action GSkimmers

-Removed more than 3% of the oil -Many of the large scale skimmers were not in EPA guidelines.

Action HMarsh Clean up

-Successfully cleaned marsh areas through techniques such as vacuums, pumping, low-pressure flushes, vegetation cutting and bioremediation

-This could be time consuming and labor intensive.

Optimized option: Combination The ideal option: D eploy the containment booms (keep the spill away from coastline and marine life) contained part: chemical dispersant, skimmers, microbes, combustion, and collection/processing reduce the time, cost, and minimize environmental damage Conclusion: BP should pay all the fines due to civil and environmental damage they have

caused. Code of Ethics "Engineers shall accept personal responsibility for their professional activities."

References

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special_reports/oil_disaster/ http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-OILCOMMISSION/pdf/GPO-OILCOM

MISSION.pdf http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics http://

www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/gulf-of-mexico-restoration/deepwater-horizon-accident-and-response.html

http://content.time.com/time/interactive/0,31813,2006455,00.html